FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-11-2002, 08:39 AM   #11
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 139
Post

It's Archaeoraptor not Archaeopteryx. Archaeopteryx is an entirely different, genuine, fossil.
John Solum is offline  
Old 02-11-2002, 08:48 AM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Edmonton, Canada
Posts: 2,767
Post

Originally posted by John Solum:
Quote:
It's Archaeoraptor not Archaeopteryx. Archaeopteryx is an entirely different, genuine, fossil.
Whoops! Sorry! Yes, I knew that. The words momentarily got mixed up in my head. I stand corrected.

[ February 11, 2002: Message edited by: Nightshade ]</p>
KnightWhoSaysNi is offline  
Old 02-11-2002, 08:57 AM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 9,747
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Nightshade:
<strong>He then accused evolutionists of dishonesty by alleging that they fabricated a transitional form between birds and dinosaurs by gluing fossils together. He was quick presenting the slides and I didn't see references. Is anyone familiar with this argument? This seems fishy to me and I suspect a strawman and misrepresentation. I doubt that the hummingbird was touted as a direct descendant of T-rex, but merely as a common ancestor which is quite different.

Anyway, Dr. Fritzler is actually a medicine prof at my university and I was thinking of writing him an email. Any advice?

[ February 11, 2002: Message edited by: Nightshade ]</strong>
He's probably referring to the Archaeopteryx hoax <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/archaeopteryx/forgery.html" target="_blank">hoax</a>. A group of nutballs led by Hoyle and Wickramasinghe (names familiar?) claimed that the original Archae specimen was a forgery. First off, the so-called evidence that they cite doesn't even apply to the other specimens, so even if they were right, it's irrelevant, since the other specimens clearly weren't forgeries and they showed the same thing as the one that supposedly was! Secondly, they weren't right. Their claim was based on an extremely shoddy criteria -- basically just looking at photographs. See the above link for the full story. I pretty much lost any and all respect for Holye and W. after this one.

As for T-rex, birds are believed to be descended from theropod dinosaurs, of which I believe T-rex was a member. But if the guy claims that it's thought that T-rex is the direct ancestor, then he is either ignorant or dishonest. There were many small species of feathered theropods that would make for better candidates, but no one can say for sure which one is the direct ancestor, or indeed if any of them are. (Some species must have been, but not all of them leave fossils).

My advice to you when emailing him is to stick to the facts. Just point out where he's wrong on various issues (like the Archae hoax hoax) and simply say that all you wish to do is correct him. You will probably get a nasty reply anyway (if any reply), but don't give him the opportunity to accuse you of "dogmatic bias", which he surely will if you point out his obvious agenda.

theyeti
theyeti is offline  
Old 02-11-2002, 09:05 AM   #14
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Edmonton, Canada
Posts: 2,767
Post

Quote:
Yeti:
He's probably referring to the Archaeopteryx hoax hoax. A group of nutballs led by Hoyle and Wickramasinghe (names familiar?) claimed that the original Archae specimen was a forgery.
Thanks for the advice, though I'm pretty certain he was referring to the archaeoraptor hoax from National Geographic.

Quote:
Scigirl:
Yeah, email him. If you want help, post it here first and we'll "refine" it for you!
Thanks scigirl You have the gift! -- I'd hate to be in his shoes if you were there and there was a question and answer period! <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

[ February 11, 2002: Message edited by: Nightshade ]</p>
KnightWhoSaysNi is offline  
Old 02-11-2002, 10:58 AM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Edmonton, Canada
Posts: 2,767
Talking

Hey Scigirl

In my email to Fritzler, I'd like to point out some major genetic/biological evidences for macro-evolution which he asserts is "bankrupt". I'm familiar with the retro-virus evidence in common species and pseudogene evidence. What are some other nifty confirmed predictions from evolution in biology/genetics that you feel are quite persuasive? I remember you talked briefly about telomeres in chromosome comparisons between chimps and humans. How does that go again?

I'd consult the "29 evidences for macro-evolution" faq but you're much better at getting the point across!

[ February 11, 2002: Message edited by: Nightshade ]</p>
KnightWhoSaysNi is offline  
Old 02-11-2002, 01:38 PM   #16
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: land of confusion
Posts: 178
Post

Alright, Nicholas. I'm calling you out son!

Enough of the caricatures of redneck, Jeebus-loving, foot-washing Baptist, Buybull-thumping people from the southeastern part of the United States.

Some of us Southerners managed to escape being born and raised in the Buybull-belt without our brains being turned to mush.

I'm heah to tell ya son--you's in for a serious azz-whuppin' if see any mo' that mess.
pseudobug is offline  
Old 02-11-2002, 03:49 PM   #17
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,460
Post

Oh no, I've been caught. Better run now!!

Actually, I'm from the southeastern U.S. too. Well, Northwest Florida. It's still in the bible belt, though. I didn't realize it until I got to college, but apparently I even have a southern accent too.

I'll keep that in mind, though. I'll try not to talk like that too much though. A'd hait ta haf y'all mad at me jest fer sumthin lik thet.

Nick
I ate Pascal's Wafer is offline  
Old 02-12-2002, 04:39 AM   #18
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Cairo, Egypt
Posts: 1,128
Talking

Hummingbirds the descendants of T-rex?? What rubbish! Anyone can see that that is complete nonsense!

In reality, my cockateel is the descendant of T-Rex. When he sat on my shoulder the other day he nearly bit my ear off

fG
faded_Glory is offline  
Old 02-12-2002, 06:36 AM   #19
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,460
Post

What a lie!!! FG, you know as good as everyone else that your cockateel is not the descendent of the T-rex. It's my parrot, of course.

Nick
I ate Pascal's Wafer is offline  
Old 02-12-2002, 06:51 AM   #20
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Alibi: ego ipse hinc extermino
Posts: 12,591
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Nicholas:
<strong>Actually, I'm from the southeastern U.S. too. Well, Northwest Florida. </strong>
Ah, up in the panhandle. Explains a lot...

Oolon
Oolon Colluphid is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:23 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.